Attachment 3 Letter dated March 13, 1946, from Dr. Wright Langham, Los Alamos National Laboratory, to Dr. Samuel Bassett, University of Rochester, re: "Your letter of February 27 regarding Hp 11 was startling, to say the least...." Copy; 2 p. ACHRE No. DOE-121294-D. Letter dated March 27, 1946, from Dr. Samuel Bassett to Dr. Wright Langham, re: "I realize that there has been more trouble with specimens lately...." Copy; 2 p. ACHRE No. DOE-121294-D. P.O. Box 1863 Santa Fe, New Mexico This document has had patient names redacted. March 13, 1946 Dr. Samuel H. Bassett The University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry P.O. Box 287, Crittenden Station Rochester 7, New York Dear Dr. Bassett: Your letter of February 27 regarding Hp 11 was startling, to say the least. The specimens have already arrived and I am making preparations to analyze them. It may be some time, however, before I get any results because I am giving our regular samples priority. In case you should decide to do another terminal case, I suggest you use micrograms instead of 5. This would permit the analysis of much smaller samples and would make my work considerably easier. I have just received word that Chicago is performing two terminal experiments using 95 micrograms each. I feel reasonably certain there would be no harm in using larger amounts of material if you are sure the case is a terminal one. In the last shipment of specimens from Hp 8 there was serious leakage on two samples. In both cases the lids were not screwed on tightly. You might emphasize to your packer the necessity of testing each lid to see that it is screwed on tightly before the sample is packed. I have not received the assay solution for Hp 7. Will you please ask Dr. Fink if he can send them in the near future? We are practically caught up on the analysis and are now working on the specimens from Hp 7 and on the blanks from Hp 8. Please see that I get the assay solutions as soon as possible in order that I may keep the calculations up with the analysis. Also wire me when you start Hp 8 as it is nice to let the analysts know when to expect contaminated samples. The work here is coming along nicely. I went over some of our data with our medical physicist. We tried to extrapolate our excretion curves and derive a mathematical expression for calculating the amount of material remaining in the body at ten and fifteen years. He was alarmed and disappointed that we had not followed the excretion further in each case. It is his opinion that the result should be followed to 244 days in order that an accurate mathematical interpretation can be made. This emphasizes to me the necessity of our trying to get each patient back into the hospital for an occasional study if it is possible from your point of view. P.O. Box 1863 Santa Fe, New Mexico This document has had patient names redacted. - 2 - In regard to the collection of feces samples on these repeat periods, it will be necessary for you to discard the first stool and record the time that it was passed. We find that the fecal excretion curve is much smoother if we use as the time interval the time of passage of the last stool of the previous sample to the time of passing of the last stool of the sample being considered. Sincerely yours, Wright Langham WL/jf This document has had patient names redacted. March 27, 1946 Dr. Wright Langham % Dr. Louis Hempelmann P.O. Box 1663 Sante Fe, New Mexico Dear Dr. Langham: I realize that there has been more trouble with specimens lately. In spite of definite instruction to the contrary, a stool specimen on Hp8 was forwarded without tape, without being properly sealed, and before it was completed. It was sent on 3/26/46 and comprised two stools as follows: labeled 3/25/46 - 9:15 A.M. 51.4 gm. 3/25/45 - 11:45 A.M. 43.5 gm. It has also come to my attention that the urine specimens on Hp8 for the 24 hr. period. 3/25-3/26 exceeded the capacity of one bottle and had to be shipped in two jars. The label for this date on the 1st bottle already sent failed to disclose that there were two bottles. The 1st bottle of this 24 hr. period plus contents but without screw top. glass inset and rubber, weighed 2462.7 gm. The second specimen (marked bottle B) jar and contents weighed 1260.6 gm. Now with regard to Hp9. This individual has given us considerable difficulty particularly in regard to collection of feces. I expect to forward two stool collections within the two days. Period (1) Control 3/16/46 8:00 A.M. to 3/20/46 8:00 A.M. Date of Stool Hour Weight 3/16/46 3:20 P.M. 145.5 gm. 3/18/46 1:40 P.M. 156.5 gm. 3/19/46 1:00 P.M. 107.1 gm. Period (2) Control 3/20/46 8:00 A.M. to 3/24/46 8:00 A.M. Date of Stool Hour Weight 3/22/46 1:00 P.M. 227.7 gm. Because we were interested in carrying out some special tests on this patient's urine, we are sending aliquots from four day pools. Those that have already been forwarded are listed below. - 2 - This document has had patient names redacted. Pool (1) Control 3/16/46 8:00 A.M. to 3/20/46 8:00 A.M. 24 Hr. Period Volume 3/10/46 to 3/17/46 900 ml 3/17/46 to 3/18/46 1300 ml 3/18/46 to 3/19/46 1200 3/19/46 to 3/20/46 1500 4900 Pool mixed and 1700 ml forwarded. Pool (2) Control 3/20/46 8:00 A.M. to 3/24/46 8:00 A.M. 24 Hr. Period Volume 3/20/46 to 3/21/46 1400 3/21/46 to 3/22/46 1400 3/22/46 to 3/23/46 1200 3/23/46 to 3/24/46 1800 5800 Pool mixed and 1600 ml forwarded. In preparing each days urine, sufficient distilled water has been added to bring the volume exactly to the 100 ml mark next above that of the actual urine volume. It is my intention to send another urine sample from the four-day pool ending at 8:00 A.M., 3/28/46. The experimental period will begin as soon as possible thereafter and subsequent urines will be collected in accordance with our usual schedule. Hp11 -- This case did turn out to be terminal, but at the time I started the experimental period, there was sufficient uncertainty regarding the outcome to make me feel that the dose should be within the range of tolerance. From the standpoint of allowing adequate time for mixing and deposition, I think it should have been a good experiment. Many of the physiological functions seemed reasonably intact. The larger doses that you mention, particularly 50 micrograms, might be given if a suitable opportunity occurred and if you are very anxious that I should carry it through. I will see what can be done. Sincerely yours, Samuel H. Bassett, M.D. SHB:rmh